Author 



Class. LLBj2^jH. 

Book .*.11.3.3 _ 


Imprint 


18—47372-1 GPO 


tlO. \l6<f 

FT MEADE 
GenCol1 


.. . _ . _ 








' 










































■*» 


✓ 





■ ? 


*■ 

DECLASSIFIED 

SEE EXCHANGE & GIFT £M^( * 
DECLASSIFICATION FILE MO. '3-n I 





OFFICE OF STRATEGIC SERVICES 


o-U> 
/' 3 


Research and Analysis Branch 


R and A No 0 1164 




THE FRENCH GENERAL COUNCILS AND 
THE OCCUPATION ADMINISTRATION OF FRANCE 


Description 


The difficulties of implementing General Giraud’s proposal that 
during the liberation period France bo governed through the de¬ 
partmental General Councils in accordance with the Treveneuc law Q 


1* November 19U3 


Copy Hop 


WE 


tit- 


"“I * 1 








' V 

















vr>tL/J) K 1 } 






SUimRY AND CONCLUSIONS 

lo The General Councils of the French Departments constitute 
technical and administrative bodies — respected under the Third 
Republic and suspended by the Vichy Government =*• capable of again 
sharing the burden of local government as the progressive libera¬ 
tion of France takes place* Only a small proportion of their mem¬ 
bers have boon politically compromised b part5cipation in the ap¬ 
pointed bodies which Laval established a s sub; ^itutes for the Gen¬ 
eral Councilso 

2o The Trevenouc law of 1872 provides that, while the regu¬ 
lar constituent or legislative assemblies of France are prevented 
from meeting, the General Councils shall meet and sent two dele¬ 
gates each to a substitute assembly which shall govern France un¬ 
til the regular organs of government can be reconstituted* 

3o General Giraud repeatedly proposed the invocation of the 
Trevsneuc lawupon the liberation of France in his negotiations with 
de G a ulle* The latter is known to have opposed this method of es¬ 
tablishing a provisional French government e No statement of its ac¬ 
ceptance or rejection by the French Committee of National Liberation 
has been made public 0 

4a In spite of its advantages as a strictly constitutional pro~ 
cedure, implementation of the Treveneuc law is open to two kinds of 
objection; 




//6 ^ 














* 










ii 




a ° technical ; The Trereneuc law was designed to circum¬ 
vent a coup d g etat rather than an invasion., Its use under present 
circumstances may be impracticable because a national assembly jf 
General Council delegates cannot function until half the Freich de¬ 
partments are represented* yet must cease to govern when o majority 
of the deputies and senators can meet* Its use may be -Impossible* 
since any announcement cf intention to invoke the Tr^eneuc law 
would invite the elimination of former councilors by Vichy and the 
Germans? 

bo political ; This method is opposed by General de Gaulle® 
It excludes the movements of resistance as $ach from key functions 
during the all-important, liberation periods Because of the federal 
nature of an assembly of General 'ouncil delegates, it would give rep¬ 
resentation to the rural areas of France out of proportion to their 
percentage cf the total population, with coi^equent risk in the in¬ 
ternational sphere of an autarchic economic policy* As a result 
of tho 1934 and 1937 elections, reconstruction of the 1940 General 
Councils would probably — depending in pa;*t on which departments 
were first liberated — lead to the election of a substitute national 
assembly giving strength both to the Right and to the Radical Social¬ 
ist part disproportionate to their following in the country* while 
slighting tho Socialists and Communists, who have been most active in 


resistance 














. 






Ic INTRODUCTION 




Neither the promise of a National Consultative Assembly 
nor the liberation of Corsica, although the latter has been ■widely 
hailed as setting a precedent for the liberation of metropolitan 
France, can be said to have determined the orgens by faiich French 
local and national government are to be carried on during the trans=» 
itional period before the selection of a new National Assembly by 
the French people* One proposal for these circumstances envisages 
the employment of the old French d epartmental assemblies, the Gen¬ 
eral Councils or Conseils G^neraux, both to serve as agencies of 
local government and to provide, through the Treveneuc law, a le¬ 
gal means for the formation of an a ssembly to take charge of nation- 
al affairso 

TShiie this procedure was neither accepted nor rejected in 
the formal announcements vtiich accompanied the formation of the 
French Committee of National Liberation at Algiers, it was specifi¬ 
cally and repeatedly brought forward by General Giraud in the pre¬ 
ceding negotiations with General de Gaulleo In his memorandum of 
1 April 1943 General Giraud proposed z 

"In each French department, the General Council reconsti¬ 
tuted in conformity with the legislation in force on 22 June 1940, 
■will ABsist the executive committee^ and the provisional departmental 
authorities. It will constitute the main assembly. In the case of 
those General Councilors who have been compromised through their re¬ 
lation with the enemy, necessary steps will, of course, betaken to 
exclude then in the interest of national unity*" 

lo To have been appointed by the then French Council of Overseas 
Territories > 












' 




■ 























« 2 ~ 

According to the memorandum, when n all the departments of 
metropolitan France are liberated," the Councils will immediately 
have paramount duties, At that time an assembly c hosen by tho Gen¬ 
eral Councils, as provided by the Treveneuc law c£ 15 February 1872,2 
will take over all administrative functions required for the main¬ 
tenance of ordero The Giraud memorandum continued* 

"The first act of this assembly will be to provide for a 
provisional government* The provisional government will then exer¬ 
cise its powers and will be the lawful political authority in France 
until the election of the National Assembly,, It will represent France 
in the Allied Councils. From the time of its constitution, it will 
have authority over the Commander-in-Chief and the former/ Council 
Overseas Territories^ will deliver its powers to ito 

"The assembly of the delegates of the General Councils 
will also arrange general elections, setting the date thereof, and 
will specify that the National Assembly to be elected will have 
the task of establishing the new Constitution of France * . „ 

Sly this plan, therefore, the General Councils would be 
tho basis of the first fully recognizable provisional French Gov¬ 
ernment. They would organize the first general elections follow¬ 
ing the liberation of France, Their authority could not be ignored, 
either by France or by the United Nationso 


2., Described in detail in Part III of this report 9 






















In his 27 April letter to General de Gaulle* concerning 
specific proposals of unity. General Giraud stressed once more the 
importance of these elected bodieso Answering the Fighting French 
who had criticised the role of French military authorities in the 
future setup* he said: 

"The departmental administration is not nominated by the 
military authorityo In every case the central power will appoint 
the Prefects. The General Councils, being elected bodies, will be 
composed of the members functioning on 22 June 1940* mims those who 
may be subsequently eliminated according to the normal procedure. 

"Application of the Treveneuc law: the procedure of this 
law to be followed as indicated in my memorandum of 1 April 0 M 










V .. 







lie. TIT 7 ! MAIN DUTIES OF THE TRADITIONAL GENERAL COUNCILS 


The General Councils in France were the "deliberating 
authorities" of the departments (laws of 29 Pluviose, an VII, of 
10 August 1871, and of 5 November 1925)o France included 90 de¬ 
partments, end every department was made up of several cantons, 
ranging in number from twenty in the department of Ariege to sixty- 
nine in Nordo Every canton in each department elected one Gen¬ 
eral Councilor according to the rules of universal suffrage. Every 
department, therefore, had as many councilors as it included can¬ 
tons c Corsica, for example, had sixty-four councilors, Fuy-de-DcJmo 
54, Manche 48, Cantal 23, Loir-et-Cher 24, and so on. The depart¬ 
ment of Seine, with Paris and suburbs, formed an extraordinary area 
which elected 140 Councilors. The number of Councilors for each de¬ 
partment had nothing to do with the population figures. Manch®, 
with about 440,000 inhabitants, had thirteen more Councilors than 
Rhone, with 1,100,000 people. 

The General Councils normally held two meetings yearly, 
in April and August. Their functions were only administrative, and 
not legislative (Art. 50 of the 10 August 1871 law); but they could 
express 'Vishes" on national economic and administrative matters. 

Since the Government in the years before the war was more and more 
concerned with economic problems, these expressions of policy tended 
to be for or against those of the actual Government. Typical pronounce¬ 
ments of the General Councilors related to the prices of agricultural 





















. 










- 5 ~ 


commodities suchaB wheat or wine, to the stabilization of French 
currency* or to the return of legal order where sit-down strikes 
had taken place. From time to time they evon indulged in partisan 
politics, supporting policies of ’’national unity" or attacking Pop¬ 
ular Front activities. On the whole, they were moderate and mildly 
cons e i*vat ive c 

Specifically, the General Councils were chiefly entrusted 
with all matters concerning departmental interests, particularly 
public properties, finances, and employees. Their main concern 
was the discussion and approval of the departmental budget prepared 
by the Prefect, and the supervision of the budgets operations. 

BeijQ£ responsible for the department’s receipts, the Councils had 
to discuss and approve the departmental taxes (the so called centimes 
a oditionnels , ordinaires et extraordinaries ) p which were the d apart- 
mental contribution toward payment for such public works as were 
jointly financed by the department, the commune, and the State 0 The 
Councils also passed on the departmental loans. 

They discussed, too, all natters concerning departmental 
public roads and highways* the erection of now buildings or the re¬ 
pair of existing buildings of public interest, such as departmental 
hospitals, normal schools, prisons, railroads, and offices of social 
welfare. They selected the personnel charged with the execution of 
those works. They also discussed all matters referring to the ac¬ 
quisition c exchange, or sale of departmental properties 0 





























^ • •*+* 


































































* - 












































. .■ 


•* 


























f. 


















































• _• 


• -*». 








7: f V" • 


. 






•r . 
















■« 


. : T ' 










» - . , .> 






*• • 


" ; ' . 



















» 6 ~ 




Between the semi-annual sessions, a permanent body of the 
Council, the Departmental Coiaaission, supervised the Prefect’s non¬ 
political activities® 

The Councils, however, wore not completely free* Certair 
of their decisions were submitted to some kind of approval, eithe-* 
by the national government or by the Prefect, before being enfcrcedo 
Yet in the teclinical ana administrative field they un¬ 
doubtedly enjoyed a high prestige and were reputed for their modera~ 
tion and integrity® They were the backbone of the o3d, traditional 
French peasantry, with many social features in common with the 


Senators 


























IIIo THF TRFVFNKUC LAW 

To those essentially administrative and technical bodies 
extraordinary powers were granted* under special circumstances*by 
the Treveneuc law* which uss voted on 15 February 187E by the French 
National Assembly meeting at Versailles after the defeat of 1870 o 
According to article 1 of this law* if "the national legislative as- 
sombly or those which will follow have been illegally dissolved or 
postponed* the general councils will meet immediately without further 
notice* at the principal city of the department, or elsewhere if 
their liberty is not fully safeguarded at the principal city<>" The 
Councils will provide for the maintenance of order in the country 
and prepare either the liberation of the legal assembly momentarily 
dissolved or impeached or the election of a new legislative assembly 0 

To rediae fully the meaning and bearing of the Treveneuc 
law, it is necessary to understand the circumstances behind its 
enactment. A largo section of the National Assembly, which was to 
prepare the Constitution of 1875 under which France lived for sixty- 
five years, was royalist and favored the restoration of the French 
monarchy under the Count of Chambord, grandson of Charles X 0 It is 
a well-known fact that the republican form of government was decided 
upon for France by mere chance and by a one vote majority, after the 
failure of the negotiations which royalist deputies had conducted with 
the Count of Chambord 0 

Most of these Royalist and Catholic deputies had fairly 
liberal leanings; the British form of monarchy, vhich the Bourbons had 















- 8 - 




tried to set up in France in the 1815«1820 era* was their idealo 

Along with the Republicans, many of them had been victims of the 

/• 

Bonapartist coup d a ctat of December 1851; they hated the second 

with 

ftnpire of Napoleon III* its brilliant corrupt* and weak dictator® 
ship vrhich had destroyed public liberties and finally led France 
to defeat and chaos 0 On the other side, the same Assembly* which 
held its meetings at Versailles, had followed with bewilderment the 
bloody convulsions of the Paris Commune; while it hated the coups 
d°etat * it probably hated still more popular riots. The coup d 3 etat 
of 2 December 1851 had destroyed the legal Assembly; the Commune had 
established in Paris a £e facto proletarian government* a child of 
revolution and military defeat* This regime had no contact with 
the outside world and had frightened the country, which put no confi® 
dence in it* 

This double fear, fear of dangers from above and from be¬ 
low, was the basis of the Troveneuc law. The Viscount of Treveneuc* 
deputy of Cotes du Nord in Brittany* typified the Royalist majority,, 
Cain and courteous, he displayed that serious and honest liberalism 
which to some extent characterized the National Assembly. Mo de 
Treveneuc had been deeply shocked by the coup of December 1851; he 
had tried to organize local resistance against Louis 3onaparte, and 
to do that he had summoned the General Council of Cotes-du-Nord and 
adjured it solemnly to protest against the new dictator; some other 






























3 


deputies like £I 0 do Porapery, in FinisteYe, had done the 30ae o 
This courageous but ineffectual gesture had been a great event 
in the political career of these obscure provincial politicians, 
and they had not forgotten ito It seemed wise now to entrust all 
General Councils with the noble task of safeguarding the legitimate 
power and public liberties, just as they had tried to do in Brittany 
twenty years beforeo 

Mo do Treveneuc spoke in behalf of his proposal on 

4 

5 February 1872 c . "'"hat I want," he saidr "what your Committee 
wants, what all of us here want, is to safeguard France against 
political adventurers, of whatever origin, should they come from 
city slums or from presidential palaces, to strangle France and 
impose their shameful yoke. 

"France has always been a victim of violent factions 
a nd excessive opinions; irresistibly France has always swung from 
one extreme to the other e « „ . During great wars, in far distant 
enterprises, the commander-in-chief has always an assistant, ready 
to replace hiru, should be he killed or captures. . » c In voting 
our proposal, in organizing this supplementary assembly for days 
which, let us hope, will never come, in providing for its election 
according to the best, the soundest, the most constitutional standards 
you will have given to our fellow citizens those guarantees of 
stability and safety which .are now lacking and which everybody expectso 

By this proposal, which became organic law ten days later, 

the General Councils were to provide for the maintenance of public 

safety and legal order if the regular assemblies were dissolved. by 
3^ See Annaies de l’Asseroblce Nation als , $ fovrier 1872, p* U23* 
ho Ibid.. "pTI^Tf?o 













. 

- 







10 - 


violence and their members held prisoners in Paris« In evern dc« 
partment* the General Council was to select tvro delegates (arto 3), 
all such delegates constituting the plenary assembly "which meats in 
the place where members of the legal government who have escaped 
violence will go„" To be legally constituted* this assembly of del<~ 
egates had to represent at least one-half of the French departments,, 
Its decisions were to be made by majority vote 0 

This assembly had to take care, at least momentarily, of 
the public administration (arto 4) c All public officials were ex¬ 
pected to obey its orders (arte 6) e Its main duty was to strive 
toward the liberation of the legal legislative assembly and to 
help the latter to recover its f ull independence c It was to be 
dissolved as soon as a majority of the legal assembly's members were 
able to held a meeting at any place within the national territory, 
or as soon as a new national assembly had been elected according to 
the rules laid down by the General Councilors (artSc 4 and 5)„ 

The Treveneuc law was passed by a vote of 482 to 75c. The 
minority included left-wing politicians* republicans like Louis Blanc* 
Goblet* Naquet* Tolain, Henri-Brisson* Their attacks remined fairly 
moderate and their spokesman, Henri-Brisson, who later became one of 
the leaders of the republican majority* merely stressed the futility 
of the proposalThe good intentions of the Viscount of Treveneuc 
wore evident* he said, but such laws would not prevent" » * ^collective 
upheavals which are the result of popular efforts or of universal 
uneasinessBy this* Henri-Brisson and his friends meant that if a 

*5^ See" Aimales de l^ Assembiee Nationals 6 fovrier 1872* p 0 422o 
6o Speech by Cho Boysset Ibid o 






























t 














.. I r v ** ., 

• ' * 

' ‘ 




















































. ’ 












»• 








•. • ». : 


, ~ f 

•V 




































































. ‘ * . * /_• i,. r • * * * 

♦ 1 








" 

- . * ‘ * ’ > * - 

.♦ O 




* * . * 
















• , • ’i 












* * 












. 










* 

* 














































































































11 


M 1 - 1 1 


large majority of the country wanted to establish a republic, the 
General Councils would have to yield. The opponents of the Treveneuc 
law advocated the dissolution of the National Assembly and the iimne=> 
diate adoption of a republican form of government as the best means 
of safeguarding the legal order and of appeasing disturbed minds e 

However, some serious objections were discussed, and, as 
two of them could be realized in the near future it is important 
to review them. 

a. : The first objection referred to the status of former 
members of the parliament.. As long as the General Councils were about 
to rule the country, should the national representatives enjoy cer® 
tain rights or not? Should they cooperate with the Councils or not? 
The reporter of the Treveneuc law., Henri Fournier, bluntly asserted 
that former representatives should be deprived of their preorgativesc 
The General Councils would govern alone if they had to^ To under¬ 
stand Fournier and his friends, it is necessary, once mere, to realize 
what their political backgrounds and experiences had been. 

The only representatives (deputies, senators) who could 
act alongside the General Councilors would be those still at lib¬ 
erty. But looking back to the situation in 1851, the "free Assembly¬ 
man" wore precisely the individuals who had been the intimate friends 
of Napoleon III, his fellow conspirators, and later on the members 
of his advisory bodies ; all other assemblymen had been dispersed. 


7o See Ann ales de l T Assemblee Nationals , 6 fevrier, p„ 425 ff c 










. 

,«a ,ol,i* . »*« 1 **•"»• n't uoa ^i# • 




12 - 


I in iitriPfrMfclTflifm^T 


arrested* exiled or slaiiie If thedeputies -who would still be free 
and loyal in a future crisis were but a minority, they would accept 
the rule of the General Councils T assembly; if these deputies con¬ 
stituted a real majority, then, according to the Treveneuc law itself* 
the former parliament would remain sovereign, and it would be use¬ 
less to resort to the General Councilso 

To avoid bitter misunderstandings in the future, it should 
be stressed once more that the Treveneuc law neither justifies nor 
provides for any exclusion of former deputies or senators if they 
constitute the majority of the legislative assemblies. In the lib¬ 
erated France of tomorrow, the situation will be quite different 
from which inspired the Treveneuc law. Assuming that a majority of 
deputies and senators could meet tomorrow* either in North Africa 
or in any free part of France, according to the spirit of the Treveneuc 
law itself that majority would legally represent France. 

bi The other important question raised concerned the ap¬ 
pointment of two members to the plenary assembly by each General 
Council, hhat would happen if the Councils of a certain region de¬ 
cided to meet in a certain place with sovereign powers for that re¬ 
gion; and -what, if, in another region. General Councils elected 
another assembly with sovereign but distinct powers for that second 
area? 

The ghost of federalism appeared thus for a short while 
at Versailleso Leonce do Guiraud, one of the supporters of the 
Treveneuc law, said that if several assemblies met instead of only 













. 


















one* for all of Franco, these several assemblies should be held 
illegal. But no real definition of legality was ever given. 

In 1872 France v/as still a rural country* The workers„ 
crushed in June 1848 and appeased by twenty years of demagogic 
dictatorship, had not yet come to full political maturity in the 
belief of many at Versailles 3 The Commune of Paris was a frightful 
occurrence which it was better to forget. The assembly of General 
Councilors that U 0 de Treveneuc anticipated v/as to be a rural as¬ 
sembly* just like the future Sonate, made up of French peasants who 
were calm and solid, with the traditional qualities of France. None 
of the Versailles representatives ever noticed that to this new and 
powerful assembly a d epartment like Lozere^ with less than one 
hundred thousand people, would appoint as many delegates as the de¬ 
partments of Seine or Nord, with several million inhabitants. This 
difficulty should not be overlooked today, however, in evaluating 
the usefulness of the Treveneuc lawo 



















- Ill - 


IV. THE GENERAL COUNCILS OF JUNE 19UO 

At the time of France’s defeat in 19l*Q, the three most 
important elected assemblies were : 

a. the Senate and the Chamber of Deputies, expression 
of the French national sovereignty, representing national interests 
bo the General Councils, representing departmental in¬ 
terests ; 

c. the Municipal Councils, representing communal in¬ 
terests o 

The last Chamber of Deputies had been elected in Hay- 
1936 and its left-wing majority represented the so-cabled Popular 
Front. The Popular Front, however, did not in fact exist after 
Larch 1938. Premier Edouard Dalariier governed with the support 
of Radical-Socialist, centci; and right wing deputies. 

The Senate was composed of members elected in 1932, 

1935 and 1938 for nine years, one-third being submitted for re- 
election every three years. 

The General Councils, except for the Seine department, 
were elected for six years, one-half of each Council coming up 
for election every three years. Half of their members had been 
elected in October 1 93h and the other half in October 1937* The 
Seine department, including Paris and suburbs (the "red belt")* 
had a special statute. The General Council of the Seine was 
composed of the 90 Municipal Councilors of Paris and $0 General 
Councilors elected by the suburbs, a total of 11*0 representatives. 







- - v ' ' '' ' 

■ 

' 

.. •; . • • 






- 15 - 


All the 50 Councilors had been elected for six years in lay 1935. 
Finally, all French f-funicipal Councilors had been elected in lay 
1935, including those for Paris. 


The situation may be summarised in the following table: 


Elected Assemblies 

Membership 

Most Recent General 



Elections 

Senate 

33 h 

one-third in 1932 



»t ti 

tt ft 

if 1935 
" 1938 

Chamber of 

Deputies 

618 

May 1936 


General Councils, 

3,01*3) 

one-half - 

Octobar 193^ 

Seine included 

3,183) 

ti rt 

n 1937 

Seine 

1 U 0 ) 

May 1935 

Municipal Councils 

From 10 to 36 
in each of the 
38,011* French 
communes ac¬ 
cording to the 
population. Lar¬ 
ger bodies in 
Paris and Lyons. 

May 1935 



The total number of General Councilors elected in 193U, 

1935 (Paris and suburbs), and 1937 amounted to 3,183; 1*518 had been 
elected in 193^, lUO in 1935, and 1,525 in 1937- 


Of course, some Councilors may have died or resigned since 
their election. Before the war broke out, vacant seats were quickly 
filled by new elections. An examination of the 193^-1937 elections 
can, however, give a reasonably accurate analysis of the present 
political complexion of the Councilors. 

When the elections of October 193 I 4 took place, the late 
Gaston Poumergue was Prime Minister with a Government of National 















V 


















- • •. • , 












. 













. 

' -« - 

... 

* . • • 

.*r? 






.A 












- 16 - 


Union including Radical-Socialists like Edouard Kerriot, and 
ministers from the center and the right. Unified Socialists and 
Communists were in the minority — this was about eight months 
after the bloody riots of 6 February 19 3h, and the country wanted 
peace and ordero A large majority of the elected General Councilors 
were at least moderate conservatives. 

In Way 1935 > the fT Common Front," a forerunner of the 
Popular Front, had already been organized ir* the most important 
urban centers; for the suburbs of Paris this resulted in an un¬ 
precedented triumph for the Communists. In Paris and suburbs, 
they took h3 seats, or 30 per cent of the total. 

In October 1937, the Popular Front was already on its 
way out; these last elections obviously increased the extreme 
left tendencies among the General Councils, but not so much as 
if they had taken place in 1936. Newspapers like Temps exulted, 
and celebrated "the Communist collapse.” 

To analyse the political structure of the 90 French 
General Councils it is recessary to classify the different polit¬ 
ical nuances in three large groups: 

a. left-wing, including the uadical-Socialists , the 
non -Ifnified Socialists , the Unified Socialists and the Communists ; 

b. center, including the Democrates Populaires or Chris¬ 
tian Democrats, Independent Radicals , Republicans of the Left , 
Indejjendent Republicans ; 

c. right-wing, including the Republican Federation , the 
Conservatives, and miscellaneous groups, like Parti Populaire 























' ' .. J'-r-j t • . • -V . J 

■ 















- 17 - 


Fran$ais (followers of Jacques Doriot), Parti Social Franpais (fol¬ 
lowers of Colonel de la Rocque), Agrarians, and the like. 

In Alsace autonomist tendencies cut across the normal 
political divisions, and thus the Alsatian Councilors are listed 
below separately. The national strength of each of these four 
groups was as follows: 


Left-wing 

Center 

Right-wing 

Alsatians 


1,630 Councilors 
672 Councilors 
6h2 Councilors 
32 Councilors 


The left-wing had, accordingly, an absolute majority of 
about 110 Councilors; it night be assumed, therefore, that a very 
large plenary assembly, including more than three thousand Coun¬ 
cilors, would, if it convened, be likely to reproduce the polit¬ 
ical feelings and emotions of the June 1936 Popular Front period. 
But this would not be true. First of all, the left-wing majority 
in the June 1936 French Chamber of Deputies was far larger pro- 
portionadlyo Its membership was as folio -: 


Communists 

Dissidents 

Socialists 

Radical-Socialists 


Total 


72 

10 

1U6 

37 

116 

3BI 


This total stood against 138 center deputies and 99 from the right. 
The left majority in the Chamber was thus much more conspicuous 
than among the General Councilors. 





. ■ • . V 

• *• Jf •• t >' > *11 •- 

• . * . t. • • 

’ . f i .' • t . * 

..:*r *v : ■; *vr* 

-w C> ' 




- .. 


' 

' , f V* > 




V 1 v .'V • ' 

. C£ ' ■ V.r>. ! V ^ -ii 

,, *V -j. ..Ulr/vrv- j v-7: •• . 

- t . • - > * *, . . W * ■*. - 

. : . plvl Slli /^is^ei^gS - ■ - 

u 4 ' * i * * ;‘,\ v* .• •/i ». t» i - • • * \ y 

,• » * '-.■•■ . • • ■ i_ i »■.<'{ 

■ ■ ■ Vi \7,.■■■.:■, Tj$ , ■ ^ 

Ji . %^M£4 ■ ' • : ^ J-' %§ 

* , * ' *1 •• - • * K< * t -V> • * 




'• - 



-. - -. .. ./ - <!* , • «'4>« : n> « t. «W • • ( !*■>< ’• ■; *•- '*» J' v ( ' ? ... 

.-. ... ' . •-• £ .: j v- ■•■•, • r. k&x v ' ■•' ■ 

* - * • 






• ■ j •• 




; 

•J 


• • • c, » 

■ 


« / 

•.,*•* •* 


' -v, V - • .t 


■ -Vv- 

■ ?- 

' ' - 1 ■ .•••• 

«* 

, I . • •»- l * •.* , v ’ / •« ► * . •’ 

. y. - v .'r* . * 

. *v~. 


• i* '» 




; . 

Ji i . j . • *J 

-r *. ;• ; . . /If < s .: ,•5.^.4 *■ ** 

V •* .... 







•• 1 -i • • - ■ fc V ■ f ’W» ■. ■ , • •' ' *. r - rx#-.— - — - - — « 1,.» .. • . t 

• •• 

• « ;.v , • • -5 * • ■* ; 

£ :, ;^V ; ^ ' \ \ ■ : 

-• ,.■ . . vv.^ A»U b —- — -*••' • ■ ... - ' 




■\ * 






r 

- I > * . - 


• • 1 K ... V - . • --- ■ 

- r. .. .. . --• * * • • •*.• 




- C /■ * 


. - . - • 

•TV- “-7..V ^ I ctv • .• - • ;f . • - • 

.7 ••■- : 77 l; :' ' *? ^> 7 , 77 : rH ' • ' 

- . ... • .. • * • -v . • ■•;■• - - 

, 

>j to) • ; r\. • 

- .%•* : ; - - - - . 

>-• 7 ■> . , •* . ’ >.' •»* ' ^ .1 . ■ . 

• ; : -*' ' ‘ 


••• . »* 




1 4 « 


c’V* ’.Ji.H-v •# 


‘ . ' r - * K, : ‘ - 

V v * f * 

^ 1 ^ ■ - • m »/ Y’ * 

... - • - •- .* ; > - 

. *. *.<• v w . ' •, *T • 


:vi 7.‘ 




- . • ' ^ 


'w » * • b a 

: ^ . * *»• > - 
r.r .* j . »f 

• a 


•»/ > . c. 




- - l > 




7- ; 5 ;'•'•• 



. • » V 

. i - * | * , *-. •. 

. • « i : . t ‘ ’ 

' ~ . . * • , V : • ' 

• . : • ^'4 , • • y ; 4 - ; ... 

V* • - '■ *■ - o -• - * • 



~ 18 - 




Secondly, there were 82 Communist and Dissidents in the 
left wins majority of the Chamber, roughly 13 per cent of the whole 
while the Unified Socialists, led by Leon Blum, were the dominant 
element. But the left-wing majority of the General Councils, on 
the other hand, was divided as follows: 


Communists 

1X7 

Unified Socialists 

360 

Dissidents 

155 

Radical-Socialists 

998 


The Communists comprised no more than k per cent of the whole num¬ 
ber of General Councilors; the leading party was not the Unified 
Social i sts but, rather, the moderate Radical-Socialists. In ad¬ 
dition, many Radical-Socialists elected in 193k had not joined 
(or had joined very reluctantly) the Popular Front in 1935-1936, 
and Radical Socialists or Dissident Socialists who had joined 
the Popular Front in 1936 had left it by the end of 1937. 

Thus the left-wing majority, in the General Councils, 
had but a small advantage over the combined forces of the center 
and the right; the Communist influence was almost negligible; the 
Radical-Socialists were by far the leading party, with about 
one thousand members, or 31 per cent of the whole * 

It must be admitted that the elections of 1937 did not 
reflect at all the general political feelings of the French people. 
The technicalities of elections for the General Councils do not 
take account of the population figures. According to official 




, • : >•; ■ - i f.-.-i i . 

' 


/., ;V.-. -V • • Sr-Xh'. fafirf lit) 




... .. . 

mri i < 





~ 1,9 » 


statistics,® the Communist tickets had obtained roughly 1 <>100,000 
or lli per cent of tho total votes in the 1937 elections. Since 
about 1,900 Councilors had to be elected, this would have normally 
led to more than 200 Communist Councilors. In fact, only hi of 
these were elected,. The same discrepancy is true for the Unified 
Socialists, but the electoral system definitely worked in favor 
of the moderate Radical Socialist party. 

The appendix to this report gives the political break 
down of the General Councils in all French departments. From 
this analysis may be drawn the following observations in relation 
to the possible convening of a nation wide assembly of General 
Councilors. 

Apart from Paris and suburbs, the Communists, in spite 
of their numerical strength, would have influence only in Word, 
Seine-et-Oise, Gard, Bouches-du Rhone, Haute-Vienne, Lot-et-Ga¬ 
ronne, Somme, Var, Corr^se, and Allier. 

The bulwarks of Socialist influence in the General 
Councils would be confined to Allier, Bouches-du-Rhone, Haute- 
Garonne, Nord, Pas-de-Calais, Puy-de-Dome, Pyreneos-Orientales, 
Saone-et-Loire, Seine, Var, and Haute-Vienne. 

Radical-Socialists would dominate most Councils. Their 
influence would be limited only in those re t p.ons where the right- 
wing, or a combination of the right and the center, is prepon¬ 
derant, namely, Arde S che, Ave:Ton, Doubs, Eure, Ille-et-Vilaine, 
Loire, Loire-Inferieure, Lozere, Haine-et-^oir, Cayenne, T'eurthe- 


TH Le Temps, l6 October 1937, p. 3 










8t-4!oselle, Morbihan, Moselle,, Ome, Basses-I^ront/es, Seine-Infe'- 
rieure, Vendee, and Vosges„ 

If it is assumed that, according to the Troveneuc law, 
each General Council is to appoint two delegates to the new ple¬ 
nary assembly, it i3 possible to forecast the political structure 
of this body. The left-wing parties would have an absolute ma¬ 
jority in h2 departments, the center in 3* and the right in 11; 
in the 3h remaining departments, it may be guessed that one delegate 
would come from the left (ordinarily a Radical Socialist) and 
the other from the center or the righto 

France having 90 departments, the number of delegates 
v/ould be 180; roughly speaking, the left would have 120 seats, 
with more them one-half Radical-Socialists; the center and the 
right would receive approximately 30 places eacho Apart from 
3ouches-du-Rhane (Marseille), Nord (Lille), Seine (Paris and suburbs) 
and Seine-et-Oise, the Communists v/ould probably have no delegates; 
their representation would certainly not exceed U or £ members. 

In view of the Communist influence in 1937 (Hi per cent of all 
votes), it may be wondered whether the French Communist Party would 
accept this position. As far as the number of representatives 
in the assembly is concerned, the Socialists would be even more 
drastically affected, although they would not be so hard hit 
proportionally. 



. 

' 














Vo THE GENERAL COUNCILS SINCE JUNE 19U0 


One of the first moves of the Vichy regime was to postpone 
indefinitely all meetings of the General Councils 5 this was the 
purpose of the 12 October 19i+0 law. Mo Marcel Bo Peyrouton being 
then Minister of Interior, They were not abolished but simply 
suspended and henceforth deprived of any activity; their forraer 
duties were taken over by the Prefect, The Minister of Interior 
appointed, however, an "administrative committee" of seven to 
nine members to assist the Prefect in each Department, Three mem¬ 
bers of this new committee had to be former General Councilors with 
technical abilities® These "administrative committees” were al¬ 
lowed no more than an advisory capacity in financial, fiscal and 
budgetary matters. Any kind of political activity v/as, of course, 
strictly forbidden. 

As mentioned above, the Councils were not abolished® 

But former General Councilors, now inactive, could be dismissed 
by governmental decrees. The 16 November 19U0 law provided for 
the dismissal of all Councilors who took part in "anti-national," 
i. e. "anti-Vichy," activities; the 3 October 19^0 law had already 
dismissed the Jewish Councilors; a new law of 8 November 19hl 
also provided for the dismissal of former Freemasons 0 

By the end of March 19U2, Pierre Laval returned to power; 
he had never favored the former measures which had abolished the 
so-called "local liberties" and hoped to regain the support of 
local assemblies; these assemblies, if docile enough, could be¬ 
come a marvelous tool in the hands of a shrewd and strong government. 


" 

. 








This resulted in the law of 7 August 19l*2, published on 27 August, 
which created the so-called "Departmental Councils." According 
to this law, new Councils were to be appointed by the Minister 
of Interior, alias Pierre Laval, and therefore not elect ed. They 
would include former General Councilors, Municipal Councilors 
and other agents newly appointed by Vichy. Like the old General 
Councils the newly appointed Departmental bodies must abstain 
from any political activity} their meetings are not open to the 
public; their programs and agendas must be submitted to and ap¬ 
proved by the Prefect, i.e. by the Government. 

The process of appointing these new Departmental Coun¬ 
cils has been a slow one. It is not known whether all of them 
have been appointed} in view of the military progress of the 
Allied armies, membership in these Councils will be considered 
a more and more perilous honor. According to a British source 
about one half of the membership of the new departmental bodies 
^•as selected from among former General. Councilors in at least 
two cases (Pas-de-Calais and Somme)} the newly reappointed Coun¬ 
cilors belonged to political parties extending from the conserva¬ 
tives to the Socialists. Whether the reappointed Councilors 
have been willing to serve under the new law is also unknown. 












VI. OBJECTIONS TO UTILIZATION OF THE TREVENEUC LAV/ 

As mentioned in the introduction, the eventual imple¬ 
mentation of the Treveneuc la* has been stressed mainly by Gen¬ 
eral Giraud, both in the 1 April memorandum and the 27 April let¬ 
ter to General de Gaulle. It is no secret that this proposal 
was a counter move to check the possible activities of the so- 
called underground resistance committees which have been organ¬ 
ized in France around the Fighting French and General de Gaulle. 
Assuming that these resistance committees should claim to repre¬ 
sent true France and to organize a de facto government, the Tre¬ 
veneuc law would entrust the General Councils with a legal weapon 
to oppose their move. In his 17 May letter to General de Gaulle, 
General Giraud stressed once more his opinion. He said:^ 

As soon as the Executive Committee (now the National 
Committee for Liberation) begins its functions, it should 
solemnly make known to the French people that it will hand 
over its powers to the provisional government which, as 
soon as the country has been liberated, will be constituted 
in France according to the Law of 1 $ February 1872. 

The first statement of the French Committee of National 
Liberation, however, is silent on the Treveneuc law. Exercising 
French sovereignty on all territories placed beyond the enemies’ 
power ”... the committee wiUtum over its power to the tem¬ 
porary government which will be constituted in conformity with 
the laws of the Third Republic as soon as the liberation of the 
metropolitan territory permits it, and at the latest, at the 
total liberation of France." 10 


"77 New York Times , 2h May 1&3 
10. TBIdTTU June" 19h3 <• 












































Times 


*4 


nma— BttS fi y' 


In fact, as Drew Middleton pointed out in the New York 


Some followers of General do Gaulle have already said 
that the Treveneuc law which calls for an election of a 
National Assembly from tho Conseiis Generaux and the fixing 
of a date for the election of a new Chamber of Deputies 
does not suit modem conditions. . . . They suggest instead 
that the law be changed so that various organizations tiiat 
have resisted the Germans, most of whom are de Gaullist, 
may share in the election of the National Assembly* The 
result would probably be the election of an assembly more 
favorable to General de Gaulle than one elected under the 
original Treveneuc law. . . . 

De Gaulle has already voiced his dissatisfaction with 
the Treveneuc law 1 s application through political henchmen. 

His idea is that the msn who will form the General Councils 
and elect the provisional government are out of touch with 
the Franch which has grown up since the Armistice. Whether 
or not this idea is sound, it is far different from the 
machinery approved by the Committee of Liberation. 

An uncerground paper, Resistance , on 17 July 19l3 also 
voiced opposition to the proposal of utilizing the Treveneuc law: 

Vie do not agree with that solution. . . . The Treveneuc 
law was originally drafted to fit the case when the Parliament 
would b3 unable to meet. If the former deputies and senators 
are able to convene again, the Treveneuc Assembly of General 
Councilors would no longer have any legal basis. . . « The 
new republican legality will only result from new free elec¬ 
tions. Before these elections take place, France will be 
ruleri. by a provisional government headed by a leader whose 
moral authority is beyond any discussion, that is to say, 
by oe Gaulle» 

It must also be realized that a definite project calling 
exclusively for the progressive utilization of former general 
councilors at the time of the liberation of France cculd provoke 
the Jarmans to arrest general councilors and deport them to Ger- 
mary before the arrival of the Allied armies. Any stress put on 


Y±~. New York Time s~7~ 12 June 1913 







































t 




















- R:.» - 


their future importance and duties which would make the General 
Councils a key part of French political and administrative re¬ 
organization might expose them to German anger and retaliation, 
or to political scorched earth policy. 

Furthermore, the Treveneuc delegates, if ever assembled, 
would be mainly rural appointees with moderate and somewhat lib¬ 
eral leanings ; urban dwellers and laborers would have seemingly 
little to say in the plenary assembly. It might be argued that 
the political or social structure of those delegates would be 
of little importance, since their assembly would be purely provi¬ 
sional and would disappear as soon as the final legislative bodies 
will have been selected, but this is only partly true. These 
delegates would have to frame new rules for the choice of the new 
legislative bodies, and they obviously would enjoy a highly strate¬ 
gic political position. Their general attitude would thus have 
a far-reaching influence on French destiny. It may be guessed 
that they would favor some kind of return to the old political 
game of the Third Republic, that they would oppose too absolute 
a personal power, that they would fight against political unrest 
which might originate in urban areas. 

It is doubtful vrtiether their views would be accepted by 
the resistance committees, the importance of which has been some¬ 
times minimized. Vihethor the heavily populated urban centers of 
France, which have suffered infinitely more than the farmers 
since June 19h0, tg.11 agree to disappear even momentarily iron 
the French political scene; whether this rural assembly, mainly 


















’ 





composed of wealthy countrymen * will be sufficiently responsive 
to the necessities of the economic world order and will not ad¬ 
vocate a general policy of protection and French autarkhy are 
aspects of the matter which could make a full utilization of 
the Trevenauc law a serious mistake for the France of tomorrow 0 

























































r-t 

© 

43 

O 

E4 


Total 


I 


ua !?2isc, 

5 


u 

o 

43 

;1 

O 

O 


Conserva¬ 
tives 

Rep. Fed¬ 
eration 

Total 

Ind. Rop. 

Rap. of 
Left *- 


Ind. Radi¬ 
cals 


43 

<H 

3 


Christian 

| Total 

Radical So¬ 
cialists 

Ind• So- 
cialists 

Unified So¬ 
cialists 

Communists 


xO t>* © O HH^O\OOJf^lACOf r \OOOQ''^tO ChvQ C- rH C*- ■*$ 


cn cn I <r\ CM m V, rH I xO *n rH in «vt I <T\ i CM NfrCO I M 

rH CM rH «H CV p ’» 

I « I CM CM I t I I H I nn I I I I H • H H • » • O CM rl I »A 


§ tflltilltlr<^ltlllrHIIICMIISlHrH 


r\ (A » H 1 *xt in <n *-» c--\ » -v^ r-j in ^ I rH I H <*\vO I H«nH^ o. c- 


o o h oo\f<)M(n(VvO 1 r-j^in^-cM\or*r>* s *tnin-ic^flocMxor»o 

H H CM «H r-i CM rH <n rH rH 

1 h 1 1 s 00 a i 1 1 i 1 1 m cn t 1 m cm h H 1 a t i i i j 


rH 

S 


m vO I ©x t** CM vO 8 O I fO r^vO I mE^xO CM I -xf CM H H ^ 

H rH CM 


iftCi I HHN WsO I 8 I • HH 0 ttCVf^M I ‘A'O ^ 


I trHSHtrHIISitSHIItttttiHlltllf'* 


m * vO cm m rH ! r-i cn co t cm cv 1 1 cncncMrnmoxr'. cMm • *h cn cm cm 


rHCOcnOCMHcn^inCMsO t m H rH » C*\ "*xO CMH I «ANr|iA I I ^ 
rH rH rH 

HrHm* I 8 I H I C\| I H M 1 I H I I I rH rH I I I H 


ft 

a 

$ 

♦> 

1 

© 


q 


w ca 


a as 

331 

^ ■ a © o 

U © W < & 


ft 


© 

,e 


% 

• m 

g o o 
© 


© 

i 

© 

«H 

*\© 


22 


O 


*1 


I. 


a 

3 9 

43 © 


©ooooo§§) b .8 *1 3 2 2 if 2 o m S I -S 5 1 © o *3 

33S ! 33$£ia5SS l 8<3Jsis<SS8863<SfifiI3 


33 B 


Li h H 2 > 6 cd 3 .c .3 J3 o 0*00 u 00 

<^5^<?<raoooooooooot^« 











■ 








- 
























' . > ' • ‘• • 














Left Wing Center_ Right fling Total 


Total 

rase. 

Conserva¬ 

tives 

Rep. Fed¬ 
eration 

Total 

Xnd. Rep. 

Rep. of 
Left 

Ind. Radi¬ 
cals 

Christian 

Total 

Radical So¬ 
cialists 

Ind. So¬ 
cialists 

Unified So¬ 
cialists 

Coonunists 



UN CM » 5 H SS‘8 rH ^r] P 

lf\# ( H • (^ ! HH I i I O' * 8 » H CM CM • 5 C'N H r-! 

(I s I ! H«n ) f » » « « * 8 O' t * « • ® H 1 ***** 

H 

* cm * - 4 - cni c\| iH cv i C'' t cv»Hcn<^r- * * h vO cv 

H cr\ I.r\ & to (*\ <2 C"0 un to un c*N H un C- un C' p 

N rl H ^ ^ 

I I HH 3 NH 6 t CM I I CM i PM * *CV* * » f « 


3 CM I 00 * H CM « CMC-'tfHUNOCMOOCMCMCMC^UN 


H rH 


* CMCM-4-H-t* UN CM 'tftO c<N (M § aiH^U'HH^‘f'^W'0 

^-»B6«*rHf#C^\»C*eSiai»»*8®* 60i 

s a » aa* a ss« a a s s ^ "3 s° w s 3 N M 


(«\ I t I » (M I * CM 


H I I » HH I M I * 1 > 


C^UNtOtOH^UN^CMCM^VN 1 CM H H 3 HUN I 1 H 

vr\ f c i i i t I *. » » * * * * H * 1 1 i H * 1 1 



Meurthe - Ho so lie 




















•v • - , ; • - • y 

* 
















































































- • 


. 




































































































































* 


























* 

* 



















































• 

















































Left Wing * Center flight Winfc Total 


Total 

rase. 

Conserva¬ 

tives 

Rep. Fed¬ 
eration 

Total 

Ind. Rep. 

i Rep. of 
Left 

Ind. Radi¬ 
cals 

Christian 

Total 

Radical So¬ 
cialists 

Ind. So¬ 
cialists 

Unified So¬ 
cialists 

C ceramists 


C3 

a 

I 


CD 

Q 


* * 

02 C0tACMv0<*K*\^ > »rvNf02r ; }c*>C2c'\oiu , \f r \CMO2^u , \02 


mHOil>Oir\«5C^\>*tC\|U-\r^ c Vr-fOCO\OtO ^ Oj lA 


I lOlr-ttltlSISIrHHiflltOSi 

H Of 

i <r\ » i cm * t> i i t i i » i i ihhi i hh i 


lACO OjC^C^tAriCA^CNJArHCV I ? "rH WO 




02 


A|p r -JC-ONr-jtOCVir\CAC^<V-^ , AOC--OC^fVO 02 (A O 


£ t\J H H H i H t I Ol 8 OisfrlHHvCi^^ 


^$-4> I 


OvO I '4 , C'*CA~4tQ<n^r ,, \ » -4 I VArH^frOlHCMgNOvNO 


Oir-l»Oir~jrHCAC^<MCO>t<V« l<n»AsfC*\»«f r NC-lr'> 


l^« I I IH1 I H I I tOHH I l N « H*4 I 


N'Jr^OJOOHH ^O'(^v<MnfMAP\fl0t0f r \-4(nO ># 
rH rH sf 02 02 "vf rH rH Hn^HNnC-fyJn 


pH 02 » '^(V^HONCjO'^sf* H ° N ^J^)32}^ v0 )5 0 ' 


I I rH 02 I 02 « *0-1 I H t « I H I 02 H I 02 02 » 


CMHnOC-*^ • H H I I O CO 02 Sf rH vO I * 02 I CA 
02 H H rH rH rH 


I I H t H I t iH I I I f 02 S 02 I I » « I CO CM 02 

r-i M 


0 I 3 

m 

r2 S 73 


o Q 


to 

© 

rH 

CJ © ■$ 
© © J3 

.8 § 3 

© CP u 
M h o 

? c? u 
o 


o 

a 

§3 

d -P 

c/5 9 


3 

1 


• © 

■% . 

4 C 

3* 

© 


w *n m -jj w vi 

© © Q Q © © JC S • Q O * 

?«• s • Z 8Sf ¥i 8S 851-1 8 8 8 
-.3 64B S j?§J £§ 3£ 3 § £ £ §f®® 

SROOMUfitSidtCj^S'JlCOCO^O'.OcO 


Including other nuances centered around autonomist tendencies 




















- - ■ 




r * 










- fc& IT i, 

%Ll r * 




XC&r-J' Iftv 

t* 

. DZ lid' 













































Left Wing Center Right Wing Total 


Total 

.Uisc. 

Conserva¬ 
tives 

Rop. Fed¬ 
eration 

Total 

Ind. Rep. 

Rep. of 
Left 

Ind. Itadi- 
j cals 

i Christian 


Total 

Radical So¬ 
cialists 

Ind. So¬ 
cialists 

Unified So¬ 
cialists 

CammuniKts 


Cl 

i 


© 


CVHNvO^COOC'lOOJOOt^ 

< ^ , f f \-^c r \c^Hc^c\J<^o r Ncnfnr\ 


OprH^-^^HOJvTNirN | r-f I 


cn tO f I I 1 I I I • I 8 I 


H I »H8 I OlOrl ! I I 


in c\i rH c*>k cr\ iH I UN -vj I fH I 


vQn^'JO I I Ir-JpJ^OO 


rH iH f—! 


r-» OJ 


(HCVIIlll'Sfllll 


O' 


I H I CM 3 ! v*\O HvD H 

*H * n H 


\£> C\! \£> C\J £>- S I »C\1^C\^On 


rH8IOil(tl<MIIII 


<>»Av\a3Hif\C'0>t(nsOO'M 
H Oj Oi H OJfvJ rH CV H 


H H C\? H rH r-l 


H 8 m -4- I I rn rH I I n M (V 


f J OiCV I H H IS H ■sf if\ CM C\f 
rH rH 


ON i cn » » I m rH » 8 —< • 


© 

TO 

•H TO 

S g 

rl 

I 

© 

CO 


© 

a 

•§ 


■is 

•p o 

O -P 


5 

*T <o 


_ .h H§ 8 o p 

MgCflH OTJC-pEd 
©OtcaOCOCGO-HdO 




4 

e 

H 


1 


117 360 155 998 1630 45 276 469 82 872 477 86 86 649 .3183 












































t l e » » i * ; o i 9 &ro 




' 


♦ t 

1 












































*> / 






















s.z.: 

-ar'Xtau 3' i j. 












- - 








































































































































































